It isn't efficient or cost effective.
While it wastes a lot of time, it doesn't necessarily waste a lot of man hours, since train transport isn't manpower intensive. Therefore the Teamster's Union hate that idea as well, not to mention that a trains might also be used for domestic transport, where the threat of Mexican trucks delivering foreign goods doesn't pose a large threat to that part of their business.
Trains are most effective when you want to move huge quantities of something from one spot to another all at once. That means storing all that stuff. That means increased inventories. That means tying up huge amounts of assets in the supply chain. That just doesn't work well for most businesses.
Or maybe we just need more rail and smaller trains that run frequently?
It isn't efficient or cost effective.
It most certainly IS efficient and cost effective.
Have you ever seen a double-stack train roll by? Say, thirty cars, each car articulated with five "buckets", and 2 containers in each bucket? That's the equivalent of 300 trucks rolling.
This is BIG business for the railroad industry right now, along with trail-van (trailers-on-flatcar) business.
If it wasn't cost effective for the shippers, they wouldn't be using the service. Isn't that the free market at work?
Having said that, wasn't it only two or three years ago that folks who whispered about a "super corridor" chided as tin-foil crazies? And folks who warned about a coming "North American Union" regarded the same?
They got laughed at back then. But seems like the laughter is dying down...
- John